Good Morning, Children: My First Years in Early Childhood Education

Preface

Keep in mind always the present you are constructing. It should be the future you want.

(Walker 1989)

When I think about the future of our society, its opportunities, power dynamics, and overall vibrancy, I think about my kids—my pre-Kindergarten students—whose needs, strengths, personalities, and families commanded my full attention for three years. Each year, these students entered my classroom at a crucial stage of their development, a period that would help shape much of their mental processes as well as their attitudes towards themselves and others. How I treated them, how I addressed their needs and interacted with their families, would significantly influence their life trajectories. I took these responsibilities seriously and used them to guide my approach to teaching.

I entered the classroom in 2003 as a Teach For America corps member in Newark, New Jersey. After studying political systems and leaders, both in my undergraduate courses at Georgetown and as an intern on Capitol Hill, I knew I wanted to play an active role in rectifying societal inequities, but I did not know exactly how I could give back to the world. Although I wrote an almost 200-page thesis on education reform in post-apartheid South Africa and U.S. inner cities, I felt removed from the real challenges facing disadvantaged communities and unsure about how to overcome these challenges. Short-term, superficial attempts to address our nation’s greatest injustice seemed to haunt the history of education reform; and the persisting gaps between children in low-income and high-income areas mock the very notion of equal opportunity. I sought a solution that reflected the complexity and urgency of the problem.

Teach For America proposed a groundbreaking way to address this crucial issue: enlist our nation’s most promising future leaders in a movement to ensure that all children, regardless of their circumstances, have the opportunity to receive an excellent education. During my two-year commitment to Teach For America and additional third year in the classroom, I would gain firsthand the insights necessary to effect systemic change while helping my students acquire concrete skills they could take with them to the next grade. That unique combination of impact and learning was critical to my decision to take hold of the opportunity that Teach For America offered: the chance to lead a group of children toward excellence, and to understand more fully the prospects and challenges that come with trying to ensure that our educational and cultural institutions respect and uphold the dignity and worth of all children as individuals. The success I experienced with my students would solidify my belief in the ability of our country to tackle a problem that many deem a lost cause. After seeing my students beat the odds at the pre-K level, I can move forward both with the knowledge that breaking down cycles of poverty is possible, and that my teaching experience provided me with a foundation of firsthand insights into how to achieve that goal. Moreover, because I am part of a network of more than 12,000 Teach For America alumni serving in a variety of professional positions, all working to improve the life prospects for students everywhere, I know that I am not alone in this endeavor.

The rigor and intensity of Teach For America’s selection process introduced me to an organization intent on giving students in rural and urban low-income areas the high-quality instructional leaders they deserve. In the days after my interview with Teach For America, I remember anxiously awaiting a response, concerned that I did not adequately convey my passion for eliminating educational inequity. I was ecstatic when I received the acceptance letter. Yet at that point, I could not imagine what a profound impact my experience as a Teach For America corps member would have on the way I saw education reform and my future life path.

My students resided in a low-income area in Newark, New Jersey. Most of their life circumstances put them at a greater statistical risk for dropping out of high school, as well as experiencing future incarceration, teenage pregnancy, and unemployment. When they entered school at age four, they were already behind their peers in more affluent communities. Indeed, according to Nobel Laureate of Economics, James Heckman, nearly half of the achievement gap we see in high school between African-American and Caucasian children is already present before kindergarten. Providing high-quality pre-K education to children from low-income areas is one of the first steps in leveling the playing field; it helps close the achievement gap before it widens even further. Such programs are certainly not a panacea, but they are a necessary step in improving the quality of early childhood education. Recent increases in support among policymakers in various states suggest that interest in such programs is growing. In 2007, nearly 30 governors pushed for more funding for their state pre-K initiatives (Vu 2007). Teach For America started strategically placing cohorts of pre-K teachers in some of its regions in 2006 and is likely to reach over 8,000 three- and four-year-olds in 2010.

While these proposals are encouraging, it is important that individuals and organizations move forward with a nuanced understanding of the challenges and prospects facing all pre-K programs. First, policymakers need to maximize the positive impact of their initiatives by shaping and supporting programs with effective educators and sound accountability structures. If districts or states are going to develop criteria for selecting and evaluating pre-K teachers, they need to have a clear picture of the characteristics of effective educators. Likewise, if they are designing assessment systems and curricula, a teacher’s perspective on the accuracy and value of different forms of assessment and curricula would be invaluable. Educators, family members, and the media also need an informed opinion as they evaluate these programs. That is why when I heard that the organization Pre-K Now—a national non-profit advocating high-quality, voluntary pre-K for all for all three- and four-year-olds—was looking for a teacher to share her insights through a weekly blog, I thought I could help by contributing my experiences to the debates surrounding early childhood education. I also wanted to engage teachers and others interested in pre-K in discussions on topics ranging from how best to teach letter recognition to the investment of family members in my classroom. I certainly did not (and still do not) have all the answers. Rather, I wanted to use the blog as a way to describe my growth as a teacher and aspiring policymaker. With this in mind, my entries reflected on my daily experiences. I wrote two to three pieces a week, and responded to comments my readers posted. In the process, I gave my students and their families a voice in this country’s discourse on how best to serve our youngest and most impressionable learners.

I started the blog by brainstorming possible topics: the structure of our day, students’ struggles with basic literacy skills, students with varied levels of family support, and so on. As I moved forward, I realized that the most substantive pieces I wrote came more naturally from listening to and watching my students. If I was going to tell their stories, the subjects of my entries needed to develop from those issues that stood out at any given time, rather than an artificial timeline I created on a Sunday afternoon away from the classroom. In a sense, this process mirrors the way I became an effective pre-K teacher. I started with a scripted curriculum that dictated lessons for my students before I even knew their names. The program, divorced from my students’ actual needs and learning styles, could not provide a solid academic and social foundation. The weekly themes and daily scripts could not meet my students where they were, and then get them to where they needed to be. Once I designed long-term plans and daily lessons using student anecdotes and work samples and state standards for pre-K, I started to see progress.

This process, more broadly, speaks to the importance of understanding the situations educators seek to change. My time as a Teach For America corps member taught me that if we want to shape academic opportunities that will close the achievement gap, we must have firsthand insight into the experiences of children at the losing end of those disparities. As a pre-K teacher in an inner-city public school, I was not only on the front lines. I was a leader on the first line of defense against educational inequity.

Vu, Pauline, Early ed gains Momentum in the States, Stateline.org, 25 June 2007.

Walker, Alice. The Temple of My Familiar. New York: Washington Square Press, 1989.

Introduction

This book is a collection of my reflections on my first two years in a pre-K classroom, blog entries from my third year of teaching, and concrete tools for early childhood educators. Most of the details pertaining to students in my class, however, are from the 2006-2007 school year.

It was hard to determine the scope and target audience of this book because my reasons for becoming a teacher and insights that grew from my experiences in the classroom get to the core of so many different facets of my background, worldview, and future aspirations. I could speak to academics and policymakers after studying race, culture, and politics as an undergraduate and then witnessing the successes and shortcomings of education reform efforts firsthand in the classroom. I could address a much broader audience as a deeply proud American whose family achieved incredible social mobility after just two generations in our country, but who views the gap between the promises of our founders and the reality of stark societal inequities. This book could also use my development as a classroom leader as an example of the kind of change my generation as a whole can achieve. I decided, however, to target my story primarily towards educators. Teachers have so much influence in our society, and yet we still struggle to understand fully how teachers become effective, whether or not they come from traditional education backgrounds. I certainly do not have all the answers, but I hope to contribute my experiences to this ongoing dialogue.

Here are a few of the 14 incredible four-year-olds who started school for the first time in my class during that year. All adults’ and children’s names, including blog entries, have been changed throughout the book to protect their identity.

• Tyrone—or Doctor Smith, as we called him in Dramatic Play—had a strong foundation in basic literacy knowledge, but he was not very invested in the class at the beginning of the year. His attention span was shorter than most of the children during circle time, and he was often sitting and looking around the room, not participating with the other children or listening to me. He showed improvement in this over the course of the school year, and began to respond positively to activities such as singing songs about his classmates, as well as other more hands-on tasks.

• Kevin came to school with strong math and literacy foundations. He picked up new academic concepts quickly and consistently participated in class activities. Socially, however, he struggled and frequently cried when he was not picked for an activity or had to wait his turn. He was the only child in his household, which may account for some of the difficulties.

• Karen arrived in my class with a strong academic foundation, but until coming to school, she did not have much contact with other children. She had been around adults for most of her early years and initially displayed a hesitance to interact with the other children. From day one, she followed directions and was focused and actively engaged in whole-group activities. Over the year, Karen made real progress interacting with the other children, particularly in smaller groups, and frequently read, shared, and played with her classmates.

I was also fortunate to have a teacher’s aide, Ms. Morrison, who has been working with young learners for more than 20 years. Her experience was immensely helpful, and our students benefited from our strong collaboration.

I hope this book sheds light on the lives we hoped to enrich through high quality pre-K.

Learning Labs, Centers, and Choice Time: A Note About Terminology

My school used a scripted program my first year in the classroom. At that time, the district allowed each school to choose from several research-based pre-K curricula.

The scripted curriculum focuses on a different theme each week. Children spend about two hours per day in learning labs. The labs are similar to centers in that children choose to play in one of 10 areas. In each, they explore and learn a wide range of skills and concepts. Teachers change some of the materials in the labs each week to correspond to each theme (for example, for the theme Pet Parade the teacher would transform the Dramatic Play learning lab into a pet store) and generate enthusiasm for the thematic developments during the lab tour and while they interact with children during the actual lab time.

After my first year in the classroom, the Newark Office of Early Childhood decided to adopt a single curriculum for all of the Abbott pre-K programs in the district (both school and center based). Instead of prescribed weekly themes, teachers develop topic studies with children that can go as long as the children’s interest in that topic lasts. Children spend about two hours per day in centers, which are similar to labs, but are called Choice Time to emphasize the importance of the child’s choice during that time. Teachers build on students’ interests to advance their skill and knowledge base by interacting with them during choice time using their knowledge of each child’s strengths and weaknesses.

Note: At times in the classroom, I deviated slightly from both curricula to meet the needs of my students. For purposes of clarity, in this book I will use the terms for the scripted curriculum when talking about my first year and those for the other curriculum when talking about subsequent years in the classroom.

Part One

Becoming an Effective Teacher: Reflections on My First Year

DECEMBER

Teaching Pre-K?

I remember the first time my Program Director, Mark Williams, from Teach For America approached me about teaching pre-Kindergarten. I was riding in a car with a fellow corps member and I thought the reception on my cell phone was failing me. It wasn’t.

I’m sorry, you’re breaking up…did you say pre-K? As in four-year-olds? Needless to say, I had mixed feelings. I did not yet understand the importance of teaching students before kindergarten. My mind filled with visions of temper tantrums, bathroom accidents, and an endless stream of tears. I thought about my own pre-K experience and could remember only a difficult transition from home to school and the sheer disappointment of attending Romper Room—which, contrary to my initial assumption and hope, was not in fact the site of the joyful 1980s television show, but, rather a small, unpublicized nursery school on Long Island.

On top of this general reluctance, I felt a deep anxiety about stepping back into the classroom after my first experience as a corps member. I was initially placed in a fourth grade position at a K-8 school in Newark. My good intentions, Georgetown diploma, and overall relentlessness failed to translate into strong leadership for the students in my class. My principal ultimately decided to release me from my school and recommend that I be transferred to another school in the district after just three months in the classroom.

I did not feel ready for this second attempt at teaching, this second chance. From the moment I cracked open Teach For America’s training materials during the spring semester of my senior year of college, it was clear that high expectations for my students were vital to facilitating their growth. I